Peter Buckley

sweetscience · Post by **sweetscience** » 11 Sep 2007, 03:56

yogi wrote:I wonder how many people that talk of journeymen being crap or boring have ever stepped into the ring.
.

ive stepped in the ring and he is boring

i wouldnt no if he is crap cause he doesnt try, he might be mint for all we no

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 11 Sep 2007, 06:20

HomicideHenry wrote:I dont get the McCullough statement, considering he was Irish and not British to begin with, despite Northern Ireland being under the United Kingdom....so Buckley, really, is the only Brit to go the distance with Hamed.

Same situation as Duddy - he is from N Ireland, so should we consider him British or Irish? He boxed for Ireland in the Olympics, but I believe he was officially a British boxer as a pro.

sweetscience · Post by **sweetscience** » 11 Sep 2007, 07:27

the irish arnt in the GB squad in the Ams

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 11 Sep 2007, 07:30

sweetscience wrote:the irish arnt in the GB squad in the Ams

Makes sense... N Ireland is part of the UK, but not part of GB, which is the Olympic team.

But as said, McCullough was a British PRO.

THEBUTCH · Post by **THEBUTCH** » 11 Sep 2007, 08:10

Peter's been a great servant to British boxing, particularly on the small hall scene, and I for one hope he makes the 300 mark. Great achievement

Goat · Post by **Goat** » 11 Sep 2007, 08:56

Buckley is a legend boxing needs guys like him

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 11 Sep 2007, 18:12

Its also a big thing for people to fight in front of a crowd and without a helmet so its good for helping settle the nerves.

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 11 Sep 2007, 18:23

much as i admire peter for what he has achieved and i respect the names on his cv, i really cant be arsed with the whole charade anymore. journeymen who are survivors are not worth a dime.

give me ernie smith anytime, he tries his heart out, throws leather and enjoys the occasional success despite his pugilistic limitations.

jonp · Post by **jonp** » 11 Sep 2007, 18:30

rhino222 wrote:much as i admire peter for what he has achieved and i respect the names on his cv, i really cant be arsed with the whole charade anymore. journeymen who are survivors are not worth a dime.

give me ernie smith anytime, he tries his heart out, throws leather and enjoys the occasional success despite his pugilistic limitations.

Billy Smith even more so.People forget Buckley was a double area champion early in his career and went abroad to fight for an intercontinetal title and dropped his man before losing a decision.

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 11 Sep 2007, 18:48

these facts make his current performances even more disgusting, he is cheating the paying public in my opinion.

yogi · Post by **yogi** » 11 Sep 2007, 19:06

jonp wrote: Billy Smith even more so.

Now there is a hard man

One man who proves that you cannot tell the boxer from his record, currently 9 - 53 - 0, Turns up, gives his all and is rarely on the back foot.

He had a nice run of wins, late 2006, starting with a war against Mike Reid in Aberdeen. I watched that one and it could have topped the bill at any show.

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 11 Sep 2007, 19:54

I dissagree I think that its good for boxers to have a few gimmy fights when they start out so that they can develop there all round game. Put them in against awful fighters then they learn nothing put them against good fighters they loose Buckley et al are a happy medium

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_q ... _n16019152

good artical this one.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 11 Sep 2007, 20:17

yogi wrote:
jonp wrote: Billy Smith even more so.
Now there is a hard man One man who proves that you cannot tell the boxer from his record, currently 9 - 53 - 0, Turns up, gives his all and is rarely on the back foot.

He had a nice run of wins, late 2006, starting with a war against Mike Reid in Aberdeen. I watched that one and it could have topped the bill at any show.

Yeah, fighters can learn off guys like Smith - guys who try, guys who are competitive. Keith Jones was another, although I lost all my respect for Jones when he was charged for benefit fraud - but as a boxer we need journeymen like these.

Even though Ceri Hall beat Billy Smith via shut out - it was an excellent little fight and Hall was so fustrated by Smith's work. I'm sure Hall learned from that win.

Buckley, Delroy Spencer et al... not sure what any fighter learns from fighting them.... mere survivors.

Coco · Post by **Coco** » 11 Sep 2007, 20:49

Goat wrote:Buckley is a legend boxing needs guys like him

Spot on

harrygreb · Post by **harrygreb** » 12 Sep 2007, 08:10

i have to say oliver that although wayne is probably a british boxer your protestations rather spoil the spirit of the statement about buckley.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 12 Sep 2007, 08:15

yogi wrote:I wonder how many people that talk of journeymen being crap or boring have ever stepped into the ring.

British boxing needs the Peter Buckley's to do just what josh fg said. Young boxers starting out in the pro game gain valuable experience from guys like Peter. Coming from the amateurs where points scoring is the thing, they would learn very little if put up against other novices and would probably get mauled if put up against hungry pro's who are still contenders.

I've seen Peter many times and he's not called the Professor for nothing. He lets these guys hone their skills, gives them rounds under their belt and if they get a little bit cocky he can quickly give them a reminder as to where they are. I'm sure that if it suited him he could beat many of the young apprentices put in with him.

In my opinion, anyone who steps into the ring deserves respect and that most definitely includes Peter Buckley.

I've sparred In a ring.

Why can;t he teach prospects something while actually wanting to win as well?

Limond came to win and he tought Khan quite a bit.

1southpaw · Post by **1southpaw** » 12 Sep 2007, 08:21

oliverfennell wrote:
sweetscience wrote:the irish arnt in the GB squad in the Ams
Makes sense... N Ireland is part of the UK, but not part of GB, which is the Olympic team.

But as said, McCullough was a British PRO.

so was mark delaney he won the all ireland title as amature but was british as a pro

1southpaw · Post by **1southpaw** » 12 Sep 2007, 08:35

people might say he,s crap or what ever but he has not been stoped since 2002 by bradley price and that takes some doing

oliverfennell · Post by **oliverfennell** » 12 Sep 2007, 08:57

harrygreb wrote:i have to say oliver that although wayne is probably a british boxer your protestations rather spoil the spirit of the statement about buckley.

Sure, it's still a fine achievement especially when you consider Wayne was world class and the class gap between Naz and Buckley is enormous.

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 12 Sep 2007, 09:05

Max Molyneux wrote:
yogi wrote:I wonder how many people that talk of journeymen being crap or boring have ever stepped into the ring.

British boxing needs the Peter Buckley's to do just what josh fg said. Young boxers starting out in the pro game gain valuable experience from guys like Peter. Coming from the amateurs where points scoring is the thing, they would learn very little if put up against other novices and would probably get mauled if put up against hungry pro's who are still contenders.

I've seen Peter many times and he's not called the Professor for nothing. He lets these guys hone their skills, gives them rounds under their belt and if they get a little bit cocky he can quickly give them a reminder as to where they are. I'm sure that if it suited him he could beat many of the young apprentices put in with him.

In my opinion, anyone who steps into the ring deserves respect and that most definitely includes Peter Buckley.
I've sparred In a ring.

Why can;t he teach prospects something while actually wanting to win as well?

Limond came to win and he tought Khan quite a bit.

Yes and if people were taking on Buckley in there 13th fight I would be the first to critisise but fighters like that in your first 3 or 4 particularly if your don't necessarily have Khans ametre pedgagree but have potential is a good learning experiance.

yogi · Post by **yogi** » 12 Sep 2007, 15:52

Max Molyneux wrote: Limond came to win and he tought Khan quite a bit.

I don't really see where Limond fits in this thread Max. He is not a journeyman and still considers himself a contender.

THEBUTCH · Post by **THEBUTCH** » 14 Sep 2007, 06:28

I can''t agree with those who say Buckley's JUST a survivor (and Delroy Spencer....don't see why he had to be dug at as well).

Of course there must be a fair few occasions now where Buckley would probably have to admit he hasn't been happy with his performance, but as long as the class gap and the punch power isn't too wide off the mark, Buckey and Spencer can offer reasonably competitive opposition. I remember Spencer giving Ian Napa a lively match a year ago and has since been awarded a draw with Usman Ahmed who in turn had given Chris Edwards a good argument.

Obviously as their careers are reaching the tail end they have to watched how they are matched to ensure there is going to be a fairly competitive contest and that's the Boards job to keep on top of the situation.

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 14 Sep 2007, 13:08

look at the record of buckley..his first contests were littered with wins...then came the mass off red defeats. are you telling me that buckley, with all of his experience, from about his 20th pro fight..should ever be beaten by a fighter with about 3 or less pro fights ??

of course he does not come to win, thats why he gets the pay days !!

in buckleys first 31 fights, he won 17 lost 10 and drew 4. since then he must have fought somewhere between 50 and a 100 opponents who have had 3 or less fights, and virtually without exception been beaten by the lot !!

its a disgrace !!!

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 14 Sep 2007, 14:07

THEBUTCH wrote:I can''t agree with those who say Buckley's JUST a survivor (and Delroy Spencer....don't see why he had to be dug at as well).

Of course there must be a fair few occasions now where Buckley would probably have to admit he hasn't been happy with his performance, but as long as the class gap and the punch power isn't too wide off the mark, Buckey and Spencer can offer reasonably competitive opposition. I remember Spencer giving Ian Napa a lively match a year ago and has since been awarded a draw with Usman Ahmed who in turn had given Chris Edwards a good argument.

Obviously as their careers are reaching the tail end they have to watched how they are matched to ensure there is going to be a fairly competitive contest and that's the Boards job to keep on top of the situation.

Yeah, I brought up Spencer - I didn't realise his more recent upturn in form - the Ahmed draw sounds okay. I have seen him too many times where I have been dissapointed with his effort, but fair cop that draw sounds acceptable - appologies there.

ESPN recently brought up an arguement that if a fighter loses 10 straight he should have his liscense at least suspended. That wouldn't be a bad call IMO, but then would have too look at performances in those 10 fights.

Coco · Post by **Coco** » 14 Sep 2007, 14:19

rhino222 wrote:look at the record of buckley..his first contests were littered with wins...then came the mass off red defeats. are you telling me that buckley, with all of his experience, from about his 20th pro fight..should ever be beaten by a fighter with about 3 or less pro fights ??

of course he does not come to win, thats why he gets the pay days !!

in buckleys first 31 fights, he won 17 lost 10 and drew 4. since then he must have fought somewhere between 50 and a 100 opponents who have had 3 or less fights, and virtually without exception been beaten by the lot !!

its a disgrace !!!

Has Pete been shagging ur missus or something??

You must have something personal against him to be so disrespectfu;